TDPL a bad idea?

[retard]

Tue, 02 Feb 2010 06:20:19 -0500, Bane wrote:


>> Except that you could argue that the government is censoring it for the
>> people, thereby making it an outside force imposing control on the
>> inside. Merriam-Webster's online definition would tend to go with the
>> whole "outside force" idea:
>> http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/censor . Generally speaking,
>> censorship refers to one group cutting out or blocking material from
>> coming into contact with another group, but you might be able to argue
>> that it doesn't _have_ to be an outside force. Still, in any kind of
>> normal use, it would be.
>> 
>> - Jonathan M Davis
> 
> Legal/moral mumbo jumbo. There are group with resources to provide/deny
> something to other groups, and there are those without that power.
> Reason for first to do it at first place? Same why dog licks his ass -
> because he can.
> 
> So if admin of his mailing list can exercise his power to make it more
> useful to majority of readers on expense of few (troublesome)
> individuals, the better. Its not like anyone is going to gulag if placed
> on ban list, for fucks sake.

At least in this newsgroup it's easy to get into peoples' killfile. Just 
disagree with your beloved deitys, Andrei and W. A good way to piss them 
off is to mention dmd's broken support for tuples or .stringof, critizise 
the featuritis and language inconsistency, support Tango, or know 
something about functional languages.